Nuclear power gaining momentum in the US

Nuclear energy is attractive to many countries because of its impeccable environmental record

Article Tools

Nuclear power is gaining momentum in the United States as the nation seeks environmentally friendly and affordable sources of energy that can meet growing demand. As the U.S. deliberates the possibility of building new nuclear power plants, other nations have already begun the process.

A Domestic Source of Energy

France is an example of a country that developed nuclear energy to reduce foreign energy dependence after the oil shock of the 1970s. It now receives nearly 80 percent of its electricity from nuclear power and is a net exporter of electricity.[1] Germany, alternatively, decided to phase out nuclear energy for political reasons and now imports some of this energy.[2]

Japan is another country that has looked to nuclear power as a clean, safe and reliable form of energy. Nuclear power already provides 30 percent of the country's electricity; however, Japan is working to increase this to 37 percent by 2009 and 41 percent by 2017.[3]

Finland, ranking fifth in the world for per capita electricity consumption, has a significant incentive to secure long-term energy solutions. Embracing nuclear energy as part of an effort to decrease the nation's dependency on foreign energy sources, Finland has begun constructing a modern 1,600-megawatt reactor, which will likely be a model used throughout the United States. Finland already gets 28 percent of its electricity from nuclear power, and a possible sixth reactor would increase that amount substantially.

sponsored by
Sponsored by ClearKitchen.com -- new products for cooking and entertaining.
Related Articles

Arctic methane gas triggers climate change

El Niņo and heavy industry leave South East Asia waterless

Over 65 million people in the Mekong region are suffering the worst drought in 30 years. Bangkok: the Chinese dams the source of the problem. At risk crops of rice and sugar, production of palm oil in Indonesia and Malaysia. Indigenous Filipinos forced to eating poisonous plants.
Presently, the U.K. has 19 reactors that provide about 18 percent of the nation's electricity. Because the U.K. is already a net importer of energy and all but one of its coal-fired and nuclear plants are scheduled to be decommissioned by 2023, building new reactors is a must for the U.K. if it is to avoid creating increased energy dependencies. The British government, while providing long-term politically stable support for nuclear power, has made it clear that it would not subsidize the industry. The U.S., on the other hand, continues to squabble politically about nuclear power but has offered some subsidies to the industry. As a result, the British model should provide a sustainable environment for nuclear power moving forward, while the U.S. model could create a politically tenuous dependency relationship between government and industry.

Environmental Concerns

Nuclear energy is attractive to many countries because of its impeccable environmental record. Burning fossil fuels releases an abundance of elements into the atmosphere. Nuclear energy, to the contrary, fully contains all of its byproduct in the form of used nuclear fuel. Such waste is safely managed throughout the world in countries like France, Finland, and Japan.

Nations across the world that are struggling to reconcile mandates to reduce carbon dioxide emissions with the need to maintain economic competitiveness are looking to nuclear technology. Under the new European Union energy plan, by 2020 Finland will be forced to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent, increase renewable energy by 20 percent, and increase efficiency by 20 percent by 2020. It has turned to nuclear energy to meet these goals.

Economic Competitiveness

Affordable energy is critical to sustaining economic competitiveness in economies with high labor costs, expensive environmental mandates, and other regulatory expenditures. This is especially true in economies that depend on energy-intensive activities like manufacturing, such as the Finnish and U.S. economies. Finland concluded that access to vast quantities of affordable energy should be a top national priority, and nuclear was an obvious choice.

These countries and others searching to expand their nuclear capacity have an opportunity to fuel their respective economies throu

The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author only, not of Spero News.
Add to Newsvine Add to Facebook Add to Digg Add to Twitter Add to DeliciousAdd to PropellerAdd to TechnoratiAdd to StumbleUponAdd to FurlAdd to BlinklistAdd to FarkAdd to Reddit
Energy and Environment RSS
Comments
So you're advocating using coal and oil? When you add it all together, nuclear power is still the cleanest. And it's very rare to have an accident. But like air travel, which is extremely safe, when there is an accident, it's usually a calamity.

by astralis | Tuesday, July 08, 2008  2:08:27 AM

The environmental record is far from impeccable as the people living near Three Mile Island and Chernobyl can tell you. Nuclear has different problems from coal or gas powerplants, but the problems are far less forgiving.

When the safety controls at a coal power plant fail, it does not make the area toxic for centuries. When a conventional powerplant is attacked the big concern is the power outage, not that the makings of dirty bombs have been stolen.
Finally the leftovers of Nuclear powerplants are incredibly toxic for decades if not centuries.

The fact that the Nuke industry afer decades of operation still requires lots of subsidies and the government limiting liabilities is a sign that it is not competitive with other energy sources.

by Michael | Monday, July 07, 2008  10:43:18 AM

Hanford cannot be compared to any modern nuclear site. It was among the first before the real dangers of nuclear waste were apparent (its been around since 1940!).

When you take all energy options into consideration, nuclear energy is the safest, and in the end, also the cheapest. It's the best method to lift millions out of poverty by providing clean, cheap energy.

by Extract | Monday, July 07, 2008  4:35:19 AM

I'm not sure how environmentally impeccable the most toxic site in the Western hemisphere might be viewed, however, having personally toured the debacle that is the the nuclear waste storage facility at Hanford in the state of Washington, I can assure you that this site needs to be cleaned up and a solid waste disposal method must be determined before we should even consider continuing to ramp up nuclear power here in these United States. Learn more here: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/342997_hanford11.html

by dcatalyst | Sunday, July 06, 2008  10:10:22 PM

Your E-mail Address:

Privacy Statement
 


© Copyright Spero, All rights reserved. RSS
Spero News on Twitter
Spero News on Google Buzz
Submit a tip
Advertise
Terms of use
Privacy Policy
Contact
This page took 0.2930seconds to load